4.2. Strengths and weaknesses of the Commission framework for reorganisations

The Commission does not have an explicit guiding set or principles on corporate values and culture which apply to reorganisations. However, due to past experience, there is an implicit set of values which applies. A key aspect is that the framework does not foresee a particular attention to the human factor.

Reorganisations are mainly seen as legal and administrative processes focusing on organisation charts. This can be explained by the Commission’s overall administrative and regulatory context. The strong administrative culture and the standard organisational structure of three levels of hierarchy provide limited flexibility to what can be done through reorganisations. On the positive side, this creates a reasonable degree of stability which is important for an institution where the organisation chart should reflect long-term political priorities.

Reorganisations do not explicitly address the human factor. On the negative side, the exclusive focus of reorganisations on structure has led to a situation where the process during reorganisation is often neglected and the human factor does not play a major role.

The policy framework established by the Communication on Organisations Charts is too limited. It is clear on the legal role and the administrative aspects of reorganisations and it establishes objectives of efficiency and effectiveness and coherence with strategic planning. It also proposes more flexibility to use temporary and informal ways of working. However, in does not provide guidance on how to reach these objectives and which process to adopt. It also does not propose corporate values and guiding principles, for instance on the role of staff during reorganisations.

Finally, the proposed timing for reorganisations of three months before the entry into force of the new structure seems too short in case of large-scale transformational change. De facto, this timeframe concerns the decision-making process between the DG proposing the change, DG Human Resources and the Secretariat General and the administrative steps of creating/changing job profiles in the information management systems. It should not be seen as the timeframe for the overall reorganisation process.

Human Resource Management at horizontal level is involved in reorganisations but mainly for legal advice and for monitoring benchmarks as defined by the Communication on Organisation Charts. However, the awareness in DG Human Resources is growing that it needs to play a wider role as a facilitator in the change process and as an advisor for organisation development. Specific tools or instruments for reorganisations are not yet available to underpin this new role. The efforts undertaken to professionalise HR development and to make organisation development known to a wider audience in the Commission are clearly positive. Also, the importance of internal communication is recognized.

DGs at sector level have relative autonomy to shape reorganisations in their services but often reinvent the wheel. While DGs are constrained in their reorganisations by the legal and administrative elements of the Communication they have a large discretion on how to do the reorganisation. This gives the necessary flexibility but often leads to a situation where “the wheel is reinvented” and lessons learned from previous reorganisations are not shared.

The nature of a permanent civil service makes reorganisations more complex. A permanent civil service has clear advantages in terms of stability, impartiality and effectiveness, but it makes reorganisations more complex.

For managers, management styles and values may not be adequate to a changing context. Moreover, in times of severe resource reductions fewer management posts are available in the future structure. For staff, levels of education, profiles and skills may not be up to the requirements of the new situation. However, upgrading skills and changing profiles require long-term investment. Since managers and the majority of staff are civil servants with life-long employment, corrective action is not easy. The Commission has to respect its employment obligations towards staff and is obliged to find adequate positions and jobs for affected staff.

This makes it even more important to put the human dimension at the core of reorganisations.

Table 6: Strengths and Weaknesses of the Commission framework for reorganisations